Mumbai Court May 1987 Judgments
income-tax Officer Vs. Metazinc (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-28-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD414(Mum.)
1. Against the consolidated order of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1979-80, the revenue has come up in the present appeals, while the assessee-company has come up in cross objections. Both the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee's cross objections are, therefore, for the sake of convenience disposed of by a common order.2. The first grievance common to the appeals filed by the revenue is against the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals) that in computing the chargeable profits under the First Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, the gross amount of the dividends instead of the net amount of the dividends shall be deducted from the total income. Here it will be necessary to point out that what the Income-tax Officer had done was to deduct from the total income the dividends included in the total income, i.e., the gross dividends after deducting therefrom the expenses for earning the dividend income and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mira Gobindram Gehani Vs. Tenth Gift-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-28-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD440(Mum.)
Where investment was made on gifted flat under several years old agreement by making construction and no proper enquiries were made by Gift Tax Officer, the Commissioner of Gift Tax was justified in invoking revisional jurisdiction under section 24(2) of the Gift Tax Act.(i) The assessee's investment under an agreement which had taken place several years back would not represent the fair market value of the constructed portion. When the Gift Tax Officer has not made that kind of enquiry which, it was necessary in the peculiar facts of the case, the Commissioner of Gift Tax would be perfectly justified in holding that the order without such enquiry was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Consequently, exercise of jurisdiction under section 24(2) in the present case was proper. (ii) Unlike the Civil Court which is neutral of giving decisions on the basis of evidence produced before it, an Income Tax Officer is not only an adjudicator but is also an investigator. T...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. K.C.A. Limited
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-28-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD554(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the department relates to the assessment year 1980-81. In the relevant accounting year the assessee received a sum of Rs. 4,42,654 as a cash subsidy on its New Vapi Project from the Government of Gujarat. This amount was directly taken to the balance sheet and credited to the capital reserve and shown as a liability under that head. The Income-tax Officer found that the assessee had received this sum under the Gujarat State Government Scheme for 15 % outright grant or subsidy for industrial units in selected backward areas and growth centres. The subsidy amount had been calculated on the basis of investments on the fixed assets by the company upto 30-6-1978.The investment of the assessee company came to Rs. 23,87,000 on buildings and Rs. 35,54,000 on plant and machinery. The Income-tax Officer came to the conclusion that the subsidy received by the assessee was towards meeting the cost incurred by the assessee in these investments and as such, in terms of the provisi...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Central Excise Vs. Precision Fastners Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)(32)ELT417Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The prayer in this application is for stay of the operation of the order of the Collector (Appeals) by which he directed refund of Rs. 24,761.26 to the respondent. Shri Pattekar appearing for the Collector only read out the statements made in the stay application.2. Shri Sukumaran appearing for the Respondent submitted that the refund claim was for Rs. 2,60,000/- originally. Excepting the present claim, the rest had been already granted. He further submitted that they are paying Central Excise duty of Rs. 40,00,000/- per month.Therefore, the apprehension of the Department that they would not be able to recover this paltry sum of Rs. 24,000/- if they succeed in the appeal is totally baseless. Shri Pattekar did not reply to the statements made by Shri Sukumaran. Shri Pattekar did not dispute that the respondents have a factory within the jurisdiction of the Collector. As stated earlier, we are satisfied with the statements made by Shri Sukumaran that they are paying Rs. 40,00,000/- p...
Tag this Judgment!Western India Warehousing Corpn. Vs. Tenth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-25-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD427(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT (Appeals) and relates to assessment year 1977-78. The appeal is late by 6 days. The assessee has applied for condonation of the delay. We have perused the application for condonation and we are satisfied that the explanation given is reasonable. The delay is, therefore, condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits.The main dispute in this appeal relates to the disallowance of Rs. 7,73,981 paid by the assessee to the Official Liquidator of the landlord-company, M/s, Elphinstone Dye Works Pvt. Ltd. The basic facts in the present case are that the present business undertaking in the name of M/s. Western India Warehousing Corporation had been acquired by the trustees, of Shri Vithaldas Madhavji Khakkar & Seth Tapulal Chakubhai Bhammar Trust. Before the acquisition of this business activity by the trust, it belonged to a partnership firm consisting of Chandrakant Kumudchandra Cheeda, and Snehalata Ratilal...
Tag this Judgment!R.B.V.K. Udyog Mandir Charity Vs. Sixth Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-20-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD449(Mum.)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and relates to the assessment year 1980-81. The assessee is a charitable trust. This trust came into existence in 1962. The trust was admitted as a charitable trust by the ITO and it has been found that the primary object of the trust was the economic, social and general welfare and upliftment of women in India.For this purpose, the trust was carrying on several activities, giving employment to women and selling the products produced by them. There were several other trusts by the settlors belonging to the same family of Rao Bahadur Vissanji Khimji and in 1979 as many as 7 trusts including the assessee moved an application Under Section 50A(2) of the Public Trust Act, 1950 for amalgamation of these 7 trusts. The Commissioner for Charities considered the application and after considering the trustees of the trust, he held that it was necessary and expedient to amalgamate the 7 trust...
Tag this Judgment!Siraj Sons Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-18-1987
Reported in: (1988)(35)ELT597Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This is a Revision Petition dated 30-5-1980 under old Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 filed by M/s. Siraj Sons to the Government which has been transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section 35P and is to be treated as an appeal to the Tribunal. The appeal is against the Collector's order No. V/29 (Section 14) Siraj/76 dated 24-3-1979 as confirmed by the Board's order No. 219/1979 under F.No.l94/178/79-AU(A) dated 13-12-1979, under which the Collector demanded duty amounting to Rs.2,09,703.66 on 45 AR 4(s) forms for export of fabrics in bond under Rule 14 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, but which could not be exported by the appellants. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants cleared 603 bales of cotton fabrics under 45 AR 4(s) forms after executing a general bond for export without payment of central excise duty. The stipulated period for export was six months from the date of clearance of the fabrics from the various manufacturing mills. Howev...
Tag this Judgment!V.M. Bhandari Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-18-1987
Reported in: (1987)89BOMLR397; 1987MhLJ930
S.M. Daud, J.1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are directed against an order for allotment of plots from the Cross Maidan at Bombay to various respondents by the first respondent, which is the State of Maharashtra. The order of allotment impugned is that bearing G.R. No, CRM 1085/54893/SYS-1 dated July 15, 1986.2. The Cross Maidan is one of the few available open spaces in this metropolis and the openness of such spaces survives mainly on account of the vigilence of public spirited citizens bringing to the notice of this Court the persistent attempts made to take over the Maidan or parts thereof for non-recreational-cum-commercial exploitation. Bhandari, petitioner in W.P. No. 39,0 of 1987, claims to be the owner and publisher of a Hindi periodical titled 'Prachand'. On July 19, 1984 he addressed an application to the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Maharashtra, seeking permission to organise an exhibition of publications, the exhibition to be loca...
Tag this Judgment!Abdulla Abdul Kadar Vs. Collector of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)(33)ELT744Tri(Mum.)bai
1. Shri Abdulla Abdul Kadar has filed this application in terms of Section 130 of the Customs Act for referring certain points of law which are claimed to arise out of the decision in the order No.658-659/WRB/86, dated 27-5-1986 passed by the Tribunal on the applicant's appeal registered under CD(T)(BOM)-A.No. 350/81. The application elaborately repeats the various arguments contained in the appeal of Shri Abdulla Abdul Kadar. But on behalf of the applicant, Shri Sivani summarised the following points of law which required to be referred to the High Court in his opinion :- (1) The applicant had been discharged in the cr.prosecution case filed by the Customs authorities and their appeal to the Sessions Court had been rejected. In view, of the discharge of the applicant by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the advocate submitted that the order imposing the penalty on him was reqired to be set aside. (2) Shri Sivani next argue that the applicant was denied defence by a Sr. Co...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Sunita R. Mahtani Vs. Seventh Wealth-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: May-14-1987
Reported in: (1987)22ITD526(Mum.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax, 'C Range, Bombay.2. None turned up on behalf of the assessee when the appeal came up for hearing on 23-4-1987. There was no application for adjournment of the date fixed for hearing, On the earlier occasion also, even though when the appeal came up for hearing on 4-2-1987 and the hearing of the appeal was adjourned on the request of the assessee's counsel Shri Iyer to 9-2-1987 under intimation to him, none turned up on behalf of the assessee on the adjourned date, that is 9-2-1987. The appeal has, therefore, to be decided on the basis of the material on the record and the submissions of the learned Departmental Representative Shri Vishwanathan.3. The record shows that the assessee is an individual and the appeal relates to the assessment year 1979-80. The assessee had taken a loan for the purchase of shares and the liability on this account, on 31-3-1979 that is the rele...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »